Indie 16mm film camera at DVinfo.net

Keith Wakeham · April 11th, 2006, 07:12 AM

Several months ago I somehow found my way onto a site selling a newly designed 16mm film camera at a very low cost. It was new and fairly cheap and realitively small and it was not an old russian one or bolex or anything like that and it was not a refurb or recondidition one.

It was small and targetted specifically at indie and other low budget people to buy (I think it was around the 4-5k price mark) and advertised as a HD alternative I think.

Anyway, Just trying to find the website, if anyone knows it would greatly apperciate it.

Keith Wakeham · April 11th, 2006, 07:34 AM

never mind, after days of searching I found it... right after i made a post about not being able to find it - Isn't it always like that, right after you give up you stumble onto it

So others know its called the A-CAM SP16 by ikonoshkop at http://www.ikonoskop.com/

Graham Jones · April 17th, 2006, 09:20 AM

Interesting until you watch the demo reel...

Marco Leavitt · April 17th, 2006, 09:31 AM

I think that considered just a crash cam. I don't think it holds very much film. And unless they've changed the design, it uses a range finder so you don't actually see what the lens is capturing.

Keith Wakeham · April 17th, 2006, 12:33 PM

Ya, last time I saw it before i found it again their wasn't any footage. I've never shoot 16mm and wanted to see how it compared to 35mm from a lowend camera.

So far I've been very dissapointed in what 16mm offers, higher cost and lower image quality than hdv from what i've seen.

Interesting idea though.

Marco Leavitt · April 17th, 2006, 01:26 PM

Oh, I don't know. If I could afford it I'd shoot film and do an HD telecine. I think practically everybody would if money was no issue, but unfortunately, it most definitely is.

Charles Papert · April 17th, 2006, 03:09 PM

[QUOTE=Keith WakehamSo far I've been very dissapointed in what 16mm offers, higher cost and lower image quality than hdv from what i've seen.[/QUOTE]

Assuming that the HDV footage is generated by a 1/3" camera, properly shot Super16mm footage with a quality HD transfer will be superior in many respects, although this is a subjective observation. The best HD systems out there are now challenging alternatives to film, although the highlight overexposure handling of film is still the "holy grail" benchmark that HD has not yet met.

Keith Wakeham · April 17th, 2006, 04:00 PM

I meant in terms of random noise. The stuff that A-cam had online seemed very grainy which even at standard def resulted in what looks more like random noise.

I'm one who can't stand colour splotching and random noise at all but luckily i'm an engineer and not a cinematographer. So from my standpoint any variance that can occur from one frame to the next that is common but unpredictable isn't a good thing. Some people like this look but as an engineer what I want captured should be predictable based on specifications. Just my take guys.

Phil Hover · April 20th, 2006, 12:53 PM

Film is still king in acquisition but in terms of post and delivery - digital all the way baby!

Barry Gribble · April 20th, 2006, 03:52 PM

That is one stylish cam.

April 11th, 2006, 07:12 AM	#1
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	Indie 16mm film camera Several months ago I somehow found my way onto a site selling a newly designed 16mm film camera at a very low cost. It was new and fairly cheap and realitively small and it was not an old russian one or bolex or anything like that and it was not a refurb or recondidition one. It was small and targetted specifically at indie and other low budget people to buy (I think it was around the 4-5k price mark) and advertised as a HD alternative I think. Anyway, Just trying to find the website, if anyone knows it would greatly apperciate it. __________________ www.engr.mun.ca/~wakeham/index.htm

April 11th, 2006, 07:34 AM	#2
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	never mind, after days of searching I found it... right after i made a post about not being able to find it - Isn't it always like that, right after you give up you stumble onto it So others know its called the A-CAM SP16 by ikonoshkop at http://www.ikonoskop.com/ __________________ www.engr.mun.ca/~wakeham/index.htm

April 17th, 2006, 09:20 AM	#3
Graham Jones Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 489	Interesting until you watch the demo reel... __________________ www.irishfilmmaker.com

April 17th, 2006, 12:33 PM	#5
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	Ya, last time I saw it before i found it again their wasn't any footage. I've never shoot 16mm and wanted to see how it compared to 35mm from a lowend camera. So far I've been very dissapointed in what 16mm offers, higher cost and lower image quality than hdv from what i've seen. Interesting idea though. __________________ www.engr.mun.ca/~wakeham/index.htm

April 17th, 2006, 03:09 PM	#7
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	[QUOTE=Keith WakehamSo far I've been very dissapointed in what 16mm offers, higher cost and lower image quality than hdv from what i've seen.[/QUOTE] Assuming that the HDV footage is generated by a 1/3" camera, properly shot Super16mm footage with a quality HD transfer will be superior in many respects, although this is a subjective observation. The best HD systems out there are now challenging alternatives to film, although the highlight overexposure handling of film is still the "holy grail" benchmark that HD has not yet met. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

April 17th, 2006, 09:31 AM	#4
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	I think that considered just a crash cam. I don't think it holds very much film. And unless they've changed the design, it uses a range finder so you don't actually see what the lens is capturing.

April 17th, 2006, 01:26 PM	#6
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Oh, I don't know. If I could afford it I'd shoot film and do an HD telecine. I think practically everybody would if money was no issue, but unfortunately, it most definitely is.

April 17th, 2006, 04:00 PM	#8
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	I meant in terms of random noise. The stuff that A-cam had online seemed very grainy which even at standard def resulted in what looks more like random noise. I'm one who can't stand colour splotching and random noise at all but luckily i'm an engineer and not a cinematographer. So from my standpoint any variance that can occur from one frame to the next that is common but unpredictable isn't a good thing. Some people like this look but as an engineer what I want captured should be predictable based on specifications. Just my take guys. __________________ www.engr.mun.ca/~wakeham/index.htm

April 20th, 2006, 12:53 PM	#9
Phil Hover Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Costa Mesa, The OC, CA Posts: 87	Film is still king in acquisition but in terms of post and delivery - digital all the way baby!

April 20th, 2006, 03:52 PM	#10
Barry Gribble Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 817	That is one stylish cam. __________________ Barry Gribble Integral Arts, IMDB